Photo courtesy of The Roofing Co. Inc., Yorktown, Va.
Photo courtesy of The Roofing Co. Inc., Yorktown, Va.
Photo courtesy of The Roofing Co. Inc., Yorktown, Va. 
Photo courtesy of The Roofing Co. Inc., Yorktown, Va.
Photo courtesy of The Roofing Co. Inc., Yorktown, Va. 
In late summer 2003, work seemed to be going smoothly on the roof systems of Pine Cone Harbor Condominiums, Hampton, Va. Seven of 10 buildings had been reroofed, and the crew was continuing to work efficiently. But the true test of its work was soon to come.
Hurricane Isabel slammed the East Coast in September 2003, leaving a wake of damaged buildings, including the three condominium buildings that had not yet been reroofed. The roof systems on those three buildings lost half their shingles, and one of the finished buildings lost its chimney.
"What is interesting is the only thing that kept the entire chimney from falling to the ground was our step flashing," says Jim Hicks, general manager of NRCA member The Roofing Co. Inc., Yorktown, Va., the roofing contractor for the condominium project. "The chimney was a wooden chimney with vinyl siding on it that completely blew off, so you could look right down into the building. It was hanging by several pieces of step flashing; it would have fallen three stories onto the cars below."
To the elation of the roofing crew, property management company and condominium owners, the seven roof systems on the reroofed buildings remained intact.
"It was gratifying to see our work tested under such conditions as Isabel and, contrasted against the three buildings that hadn't been reroofed, emerging as a far superior installation and design," Hicks says.
The Roofing Co. was chosen for the project by an invitation-only competitive bid and was asked to reroof one of the 10 buildings in the Pine Cone Harbor Condominiums complex. If the job on that building went well, The Roofing Co. would be awarded the other buildings on a "one-at-a-time" basis, Hicks says.
"The condominium association only had enough money to pay for two or three buildings a year," he says. "So each building was a separate contract."
Hicks was pleased the property management company was focused on a quality job.
"The company was interested in making the investment to have a quality specified job instead of the cheapest price," he says.
Out with the old
The roofing crew began work on the first building in spring 2000. The original roof system was three to four stories high and consisted of 100 squares (929 m²) of 40-year architectural laminate shingles that had to be torn off. Because the roof had "dead valleys" that allowed water to back up, there were many leaks in the building.
One of the first challenges the crew faced was debris removal in the face of frequent rough winds.
"By the water, it can get windy and small debris can fly a long ways," Hicks says. "Debris removal was a challenge in the beginning and drove the need for a debris chute. Unfortunately, no one made a debris chute just for steep-slope roofing. The only debris chute we found had a hopper attachment that connected to the parapet wall of a low-slope roof. The chute was designed to hang from the hopper. Unfortunately, no one had designed a way to anchor a hopper to a steep-slope roof or, for that matter, to secure a chute to a steep-slope roof. So we had to figure out how to use a debris chute made for low-slope roofs."
The company ended up fashioning a debris chute, secured in place with chains and supported by 40-foot (12-m) ladders, which was used during the tear-off process.
"This allowed the debris to be removed from the roof in an efficient manner, posed little or no risk to cars in the parking lot, and minimal disruption to the entryways to the buildings," Hicks says.
Also, a large section of the roof was a 12-in-12 (45-degree) slope and three stories at the gutter.
"Because of the height off the ground and steep slope, it made working slow," Hicks says. "The fact that the buildings are right on the water made wind gusts a bigger factor than usual."
Another challenge was working with the constant input of the condominium owners.
"The first building tested our patience because every condo owner wanted to talk to the crew about something," Hicks says. "We negotiated provisions in the subsequent contracts that prevented this."
In with the new
When The Roofing Co. started replacing the old shingles, it had to promote a material upgrade because the original specification called for installation of lightweight 30-year laminate shingles, which were less expensive than the more wind-resistant shingles being proposed. But the board eventually agreed to the upgrade.
"Because of the waterfront exposure and high winds, we suggested the CertainTeed Hatteras® shingle because of its 110-mph (177-km/h) wind warranty," Hicks says. "The roof consultant then specified that all felt and waterproofing underlayment also be CertainTeed Roofer's Select™ and Winterguard.™"
With five workers laboring on the roof, The Roofing Co. removed all 0.019-inch- (0.5-mm-) thick flashings and replaced them with 0.032-inch- (0.8-mm-) thick step and apron flashing. All siding above the roof line was replaced, and the crew installed a 0.032-inch- (0.8-mm-) thick drip edge. Curb-mounted Velux FCM skylights replaced the flush-mounted skylights, and all chimney chase covers were replaced with soldered lead-coated copper chase covers sloped for positive drainage.
However, the most unique specification was the roof consultant's design for reframing the dead valleys and installing open lead-coated soldered copper valleys to facilitate the movement of water off the roof in existing problem areas, Hicks says.
"This specification was so effective it created a 'geyser effect,' shooting water off the roof from three stories in the air and hitting residents' cars in the parking lot," he says. "We wrote a change order for an oversized conductor head with backsplashes on the gutter system to prevent this."
After the storm
Work on the first building took almost a month, which was much longer than anticipated.
"We anticipated the first job would take about two weeks," Hicks says. "We and the property management company learned a lot of lessons. Our strength was our communication with the owners. After the first building, I addressed the condominium owners' board about some miscommunication and expectations."
However, the crew became more efficient with each subsequent building.
"I think the board and the management company were encouraged by our willingness to tell the truth and not sugarcoat anything," Hick says. "This built a lot of trust and confidence in our character and competence and carried through to the work on the other buildings."
Luckily, Hurricane Isabel did not affect The Roofing Co.'s work on the condominiums.
"The management company only gave us two to three buildings a year to do," Hicks says. "This was all they could afford. They usually would give us one to do in the spring and one in the summer or fall. Therefore, we were not working on the site when Hurricane Isabel hit. We had not yet been given the 'go-ahead' for the next building."
The association soon gave the "go-ahead," awarding the last three condominium buildings soon after Hurricane Isabel wiped them out.
"A good process and preconstruction meetings allowed us to complete the final three buildings in one month," Hicks says. "So I guess that would mean that, compared with the first building, we were working three times as fast by the end of it."
The Roofing Co.'s work did not go unappreciated, especially after successfully facing a violent tropical storm.
"The condominium board liked us after the first seven buildings were built," Hicks says. "But after September 2003, we were heroes."
Krista Reisdorf is associate editor of Professional Roofing magazine.
COMMENTS
Be the first to comment. Please log in to leave a comment.